Court : US Supreme Court
..... cross-examine the witnesses against him. only a person appearing as a witness may cross-examine other witnesses. cross-examination is further limited to those questions which the commission "deems to be appropriate to its inquiry," and those questions must be submitted, presumably beforehand, in writing to the commission. we have frequently emphasized that the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses is a fundamental aspect of procedural due process. see, ..... appellant, a labor union member, filed this suit in the district court for declaratory and injunctive relief challenging as violative of due process and equal protection the louisiana statute that creates a body called the labor-management commission of inquiry for the purpose of investigating and finding facts relating to violations of state or federal criminal laws in the labor-management relations field. the commission, appointed by the governor, is to hold public hearings concerning such alleged violations ..... judge court was convened, and that court ultimately granted appellees' motion to dismiss the complaint. jenkins v. mckeithen, 286 f.supp. 537 (d.c.e.d.la.1968). we noted probable jurisdiction of an appeal brought under 28 u.s.c. 1253. [ footnote 1 ] we reverse. since the case was decided on a motion to dismiss, a rather detailed examination of the structure of the act and of the allegations of the complaint is necessary. i the impetus for the formation of the commission was stated in the preamble of the act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
..... of proved cwp no.15639 o 6. misconduct or incapacity as per the provision of the judges (inquiry) act, 1968 and after an address by the state vidhan sabha supported by a majority of the total membership of the house and a majority of not less than two thirds of the members present and voting. keeping in view the above said object of the act, when the provisions of sections 8 and 10 of the act are read together for the purpose of their harmonious interpretation, it becomes clear that sections ..... another official from the office of respondent no.3. in this view of the matter, it is unhesitatingly held that once the responsible officers of the state government were attending the proceedings before the lokayukta, provisions of section 23(1) of the act would stand complied with. further, it is not the case of the petitioner that he had been exonerated by another competent authority of the state government in the cwp no.15639 o 8. similar complaint. ..... are independent of each other. section 8 deals with the reference received by the lokayukta from the government,whereas under section 10 of the act, the lokayukta is competent to entertain the complaint moved by any person. complete procedure has been provided under the act. the preamble of the haryana lokayukta act,2002, reads as under :- an act to provide for the appointment and function of a lokayukta for enquiry and investigation into the allegations and grievances against public servants and for matters connected therewith. it .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1969Bom333; (1969)71BOMLR168; ILR1969Bom837; 1969MhLJ383
..... their lordships, then undoubtedly we would be bound by the decision and would have to hold that the provisions of chapter va of the act are violative of art, 14 and, therefore, invalid.5. in ramkrishna dalmia v. mr. justice tendolkar, : [1959]1scr279 the question whether the commissions of inquiry act was violative of art 14 of the constitution arose before a bench of five judges. das c.j. made six propositions after referring to the cases decided by the said court prior to that date. proposition ..... 2scr169 and by this court in govindji vithaldas v. municipal corporation. 59 blr 129 and by the supreme court in k.l. gupte v. corporation, greater bombay, : [1968]1scr274 and also by this court in a recent case. the effect of the decisions is that the limitations subject to which the discretion can be exercised can be ascertained by the court from the preamble, the surrounding circumstances, disclosed by well-known and notorious facts or those disclosed by affidavits. the n.l. caterers' case : [1967]3scr399 does not decide anything ..... knowledge of the past, these powers were acquired by the board. it is true that technically there would be an option on the part of the board to file a suit for getting any of the reliefs provided for in sections 53-a and 53-b (1) of the act of 1948. however, it is well-nigh impossible that any suit would ever be filed having regard to the circumstances under which the powers were obtained. in our opinion, as there is no chance of a suit being filed, there .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1973AP1
..... allowed to have adjudication of his defence. the position under section 11 offers parallel to this extent that the amount claimed by the landlord has to be paid as a condition precedent to participate at the inquiry. the object will be frustrated if the section is to be construed in the manner asked for by the respondent. if that construction were to prevail, one has only to deny the relationship of tenancy to continue in possession ..... there should not be any dispute regarding the relationship of landlord and tenant. in the decision of the madras high court which is of a single judge, the consideration was of section 7-a of the madras buildings ( lease and rent control ) act, which is similar to the present section 11 of the act. the learned judge who decided that case took the view that the disability imposed by section 7-a is only on a tenant and not on any person and in a proceeding for ..... 1) for deciding the relationship of landlord and tenant. on this the learned judges observed that they are inclined to agree with the decision of chandrasekhara sastry, j., in iswarlal v. khursheed begum. (1968) 2 andh wr 52, that section 11 applies only to cases of admitted tenancy and no summary enquiry admitted tenancy and summary enquiry can be held under that provision for determination whether the relationship of landlord and tenant exists between the parties. this is how the matter came to be referred to a full bench by the learned judges.9. as the preamble shows the object of the act .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2001SC2631; JT2001(5)SC416; 2001(4)SCALE327; (2001)6SCC50; [2001]3SCR969
..... up together. in course of the hearing, it has transpired that the government has been ready and willing for the appointment of a sitting judge of the high court as a commission of inquiry under section 3 of the commissions of inquiry act, 1952. proceeding in w.p.no.26456 of 1996 has been taken up on the basis of a report of the district judge, visakhapatnam and by order of this court, issuance of cheques in land acquisition cases, pending at various stages in the sub-courts at anakapalle ..... conferred on the appropriate government by s. 3 of the act and it cannot be questioned on the ground of its going beyond the provisions of the act.'(emphasis supplied)13. in p.v. jagannath rao and others vs . the state of bihar : [1968]3scr789 a constitution bench of this court held:'.the purpose of the enquiry is stated in the preamble to the notification which states that 'the matters aforesaid regarding the aforesaid persons should be enquired into through a commission of inquiry so that facts may be found which along ..... /96. the full bench comprising of the chief justice and two other learned judges directed notices to be issued to the respondents and ordered that pending further orders, stay of payment of amounts under the decreed relating to yeleru reservoir land acquisition cases. the matter was then directed to be listed before a division bench. the state government had directed investigation by c.b. c.i.d. in november, 1996 enquiry was also ordered into the alleged irregularities in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1980)2SCC665; 1980Supp(1)SCC249
S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.1. These two criminal appeals are directed against a judgment dated 27th February 1979 of the Sessions Judge, Delhi by which the accused (hereinafter referred to as the appellants) have been convicted under various Sections of the Penal Code and awarded sentences of various terms of imprisonment not exceeding two years (which have been ordered to run concurrently) in addition to fines2. Both the appeals were originally filed before the Delhi High Court and were admitted by it on the 21st March 1979 when the sentences of the appellants were suspended and they were released on bail. On the 17th May. 1979, the State also filed an appeal to the Delhi High Court for enhancement of the sentences. The Special Courts Act (No. 22 of 1979 and hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') was passed by Parliament and received the assent of the President on 16th May 1979. On the 27th June 1979, the Central Government made a declaration Under Section 5(1) of the Act as a conse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC962; 1980CriLJ690; 1980Supp(1)SCC92; [1980]2SCR380
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 562 of 1979. From the order dated 17-9-1979 of the Special Court at New Delhi in Criminal Case No. 1/79. P. R. Mridul, and O. P. Sharma for the Appellant. Soli J. Sorabjee, Solicitor General of India, R. N. Sachthey, Girish Chandra, Bipin Behari Lal and Miss Niklam Grover for the Respondent. The Judgment of S. Murtaza Fazal Ali and A. P. Sen, JJ. was delivered by Fazal Ali, J. D. A. Desai gave a separate opinion and P. N. Shinghal, J. gave a dissenting opinion. FAZAL ALI, J.-This appeal is directed against an order dated 17th September 1979 passed by Justice Joshi, Special Judge appointed under the Special Courts Act, 1979 (No. 22 of 1979) (hereinafter to be referred as the 'Act') by which the learned Judge directed a charge to be framed against the appellant under s. 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with s. 5 ( 1 ) (d) and s. 5 (2) of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1947 and also under s. 5(2) read with s. 5(1)(d) of the sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1977Mad192
1. This petition is filed by Mr. Karunanidhi, former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, under Art. 226 of the Constitution for the issue of a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to Notification No. SO-74(E) dated 3-2-1976, issued by the Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms, Government of India, under S. 3 of the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1952, and quash the same. The affidavit filed in support of this petition, after setting out the history of the Government of Tamil Nadu and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, which was running the Government from 1967 upto 31st January 1976, refers to the proclamation issued by the President of India on 31-1-1976 under Art. 356 of the Constitution of India assuming to himself the functions of the Government of the State of Tamil Nadu and the powers of the Government of the State, suspending the provisions of the Constitution relating to the Council of Ministers in the State and dissolving the Legislative Assembly. The Proclamation im...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : [1975]101ITR721(J& K)
..... tribunal. we are fortified in this view by a catena of authorities.17. relying on the decision of the privy council in the case of in re maharaja madhava singh [1905] ilk 32 cal 1 a division bench of the nagpur high court held in m. v. rajwa.de v. dr. s. m. hassan air 1954 nag 71 that the commission governed by the commissions of inquiry act, 1952, is a fact-finding body which is appointed by the state government 'for the information of its own mind' in order that it should not ..... part to show the aforesaid sale at the pathankote depot and why low yield of sawn timber had been shown by it. the points raised by the income-tax officer were replied to by the assessee by its letter dated november 28, 1968. not feeling satisfied with the explanation tendered by the assessee, the income-tax officer added a sum of rs. 36,000 ' for suppression of sales ' made at the pathankote depot andholding the plea taken by the assessee regarding the logs lying in the forest ..... up by the government of jammu and kashmir to inform its own mind regarding some matters of public importance. a perusal ;of the preamble and the note appended to notification no. sro 39 dated january 30, 1965, published in the jammu and kashmir government gazette dated january 30, 1965, would show that a commission of inquiry consisting of shri n. rajagopala ayyangar, retired judge of tho supreme court of india, was constituted to inquire into and report regarding certain allegations of pecuniary and other benefits by bakshi .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2002(4)ALLMR807; (2002)104BOMLR561
..... to any corporation shall be called in question except by an election petition presented to the judge referred to in sub-section (1) and no judge other than the judge referred to in sub-section (1) shall entertain any dispute in respect of such election.(3) the judge shall decide the applications made under sub-section (1) or (2) after holding an inquiry in the manner provided by or under this act.404. (1) if the judge sets aside an election of a candidate on the ground that a corrupt practice has been ..... of section 9 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 and thus only a civil court has jurisdiction to decide such a right of a claimant. the provisions of section 10(4) of the act are, therefore, contrary to the provisions of section 9 of the civil procedure code.26. the preamble of the act states that it is an act to provide for the regulation of the issuance and verification of caste certificates to the persons belonging to the scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, denotified tribes (vimukta jatis), nomadic tribes, other backward classes ..... 1979 in which the caste of kailash was shown as 'nirank'. his sister lilabai was also a student of zilla parishad primary school, bhoigaon and the head master of the said school issued a school leaving certificate on 13th july, 1968 in which her caste is shown as 'nirank'. ashok ramrao thorat, the petitioner's brother was issued a caste certificate by the taluka executive magistrate, aurangabad on 10th july, 1981 and for the first time his caste .....
Tag this Judgment!